Contributions
of Ecological and Cultural Conservancy to Sustainable Development and Resilience

PAPER
SUBMITTED TO THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CONSERVANCY AND DEVELOPMENT

September
1999, Yunnan Province, China

The
past fifty years have witnessed an enormous increase in our knowledge of our
species and our planet and in particular the impacts of one on the other. This
knowledge has raised serious concerns about the global impact of human domination
on our planet which is itself in many ways the result of the increased development
that our knowledge has enabled. Some specific global concerns that have emerged
so far include the ozone hole, global warming, bio-diversity reduction, water
and air pollution, landscape fragmentation and soil depletion. There is concern
that if left unchecked our pursuit of increased development and efficiency will
make our whole planet unlivable or less resilient to future changes.

This
very same knowledge and its products like the computer and the Internet are
causing major social and cultural disruptions similar to those experienced in
the Industrial Revolution. The role of culture and, more generally, social capital
(institutions and political processes) in mediating large shifts in economic
development is very clear. These social disruptions are well documented and
appear to be culturally dependent yielding very different results in Asian and
African countries than in the United States. One measure is illustrated by comparing
the impact of change on Japan and the United States, or by comparing developing
countries that have achieved economic advances similar to France and Britain
with those countries. In particular, Japan--which maintained its underlying
cultural norms--has shown much less social disruption than the United States
(divorce rates, crime etc.). This suggests that developing countries need to
exercise caution in making cultural changes and in developing social capital
in their attempt to increase the standard of living of their people.

Similarly,
if one looks at changes in ecological systems produced in our past through changing
our environment--as during the glacial periods--it also clear that some systems
are more resilient (e.g. survive change better) than others. In many cases very
dominant and efficient ecological systems are less resilient to environmental
change in the long run. In some cases, resilience depends upon species that
played only an insignificant role prior to the change in the environment. Thus,
while many species play a useful role by currently providing services to humans,
or more generally stabilizing our planetís major systems (e.g. treesí absorption
of carbon in the atmosphere), others can play an important role if the environment
were to change.

In
very general terms, there seems to be a trade-off between effectiveness in the
present and resilience to change in the future, which supports the need for
ecological and cultural diversity, and thus conservancy. In one classic example
a grassland in its natural state supports both a drought resistant species of
grass and a more lush grass species less resilient to drought. Ranchers interested
in efficiency, converted the site to supporting only the more lush grass species,
which proved more profitable over the short term. The inevitable onset of drought
devastated the more lush grasses, and the eradication of the drought resilient
species left the site barren. Safeguarding resilience as a reason for conservation
is distinct from the reasons to support ecological and cultural diversity based
on ethical and quality of life considerations or even important contributions
to the current functioning of our planetary systems and economy (e.g. sustainable
development).

This
conceptual analysis suggests a need to decide what kind of societal system is
most appropriate in a specific case. If a specific cultural or ecological component
can contribute to current efficiency (sustainable development), then a properly
designed economic and social system should support such activities. Contemporary
research is exploring the implicit and explicit costs and benefits of functioning
ecosystems and what changes are needed to internalize them into the economic
and social system. However, if the dominant role of specific cultural practices
or ecological components is viewed either as insurance against future changes
or as a contribution to our quality of life, then more public or citizen-driven
resources must be called upon to maintain them.

Of
course, the history of our planet teaches us that some species vanish naturally
because they cannot adapt to changes, and in so doing creates niches in many
cases for new species that may be better adapted to the new environment--the
disappearance of the dinosaurs is thought to have made our emergence possible.
This has clearly also been the case for many past cultural practices.

Our
long term goal should be to obtain the knowledge needed to make the right choices
as to where to focus our conservancy efforts and resources, to ensure we preserve
those useful today, important for the future, and/or important to our quality
of life. Because of differing opinions on how to weigh each of these factors,
and the current strong interconnections and impacts between ecological and human
systems, this analysis is complex and there are many different views of how
best to proceed. In simple terms, these appear to vary from a bottom line "survival
of the fittest" view to the view that any loss of ecological or cultural diversity
is either immoral or a tragedy. Finding the middle ground, in particular the
balance between current effectiveness and long term resilience in our ecological
and cultural systems, is the challenge we all face as we enter the 21st
century.

I
would like to end this conceptual summary with a personal perspective. I believe
we have or will have all the knowledge and technological capabilities to address
the material needs to achieve sustainability. The real challenge is for the
people to have a value system and framework that will enable them to balance
effectiveness in the present with the needs for long-term resilience. The tools
available exceed the insights we have so far gained on how to proceed. The role
of cultural roots generalized to even include our evolutionary roots and connection
to other species will be very important for us to achieve the right balance.
Thus ecological and cultural conservancy, in my opinion, has a very important
role in our long-term resilience; it will help guide us to make wise choices.